Well as I recall everyone at the time thought it was binding. And no political leader, even the liberals that oppose Brexit, is claiming that it is unconstitutional. There has been no significant legal challenges on the referendum consequences and finally there was an election where 85% of the votes were for parties that supported Brexit.

Click to expand...

Thinking something to be so doesn't make it so.

There's a big difference between non-binding and unconstitutional, fact is referendums in the UK are advisory and it's only via parliament that constitutional actions can be enacted, that's what representative governments mean, we elect people to represent us but that doesn't mean their obliged to do what we tell them, especially if they consider or know what we want would be against the best interests of the country.

I'd also propose that 85% of the votes were for parties that supported Brexit because there was only (afaik) a single party who put the countries best interests above their own political careers, that and they had next to no chance of being in government so didn't have to bother following through with what they said.

If you wanted a constitutional crisis then you would have needed Cameron to take the traditional EU approach to referendums where on the 24th of June last year, he would have stood outside No 10, pointed out that people had voted the wrong way and announced that there would be another referendum in a years time so people could do what they were told to.

Click to expand...

Actually the traditional approach of the EU when they don't get the result they want is to go away and reconsider whatever people rejected, make compromises, rewrite it, and put the new proposal to another vote then rinse and repeat.

That's actually how democracy is meant to work BTW, not as it does in this country where one party can force through whatever they like, democracy is meant to represent the majority and be about making compromises in order to please as many people as possible.

Waste and fraud didn't really matter as the cause was so noble and EU spending was a good thing by definition. So making the case for the EU became harder and harder to the point where politicians avoided talking about it for years.

Click to expand...

I'm not going to deny there is waste and fraud as any large'ish organisation has to deal with that, however when compared to the UK the EU is a veritable angle, it cost less than 1% of the GNI of the whole EU, their civil service is (iirc) the equivalent size of Birmingham City Council and only amounts to 6% of the total EU budget (half of which are staff wages), compared to the UK's central government 500k civil service staff the EU's 50k pale in comparison.

She either has to convince the EU to downgrade the rights of EU citizens to UK standards and make EU citizens subject to all future rights downgrades in the UK (the EU is extremely unlikely to agree to that for obvious reasons) or she upgrades the rights of people in the UK to EU standards and guarantees that they won't be downgraded in the future (political suicide for any conservative politician).

The reason Cameron put up such a feeble case for Remain was that he could not admit that all the complaints attributed to the EU and EU immigration by Leave were in fact attributable to the UK government's own decisions and actions.

Click to expand...

This. This is the only real reason because the terrible campaigning on both sides, to admit the real truth about the EU would require backtracking years and years of propaganda and government failures. The only upside is that it appears the politicians are personally suffering for it.

On a serious note someone important at Tory Hq must know this is going to ruin there chance at government for decades. I can’t belive they won’t have a plan to get rid of the current leadership as sacrificial lambs and force a GE.

Even if they then loose that election to labour completely, the damage to there reputation will be far less than being the party that destroyed the UK.

The Tories know, deep down, even if this goes tits up, they'll probably be returned to power in the near future... IIRC, the typical lifespan of a post-war govt is 9 years [7.5 years for Labout govts, 10.5 for Tory govts, less if you dismiss Blair and Thatcher as outliers].

I think they're still in denial. There are some hard core Brexiteers who actually believe that the UK will be just fine in the WTO because hey, other countries are. A bit like a lion evolved to live on the African plains will surely be alright living in the sea because sharks seem to manage just fine.

The rest still seems to buy into the narrative that negotiations in the EU bureaucracy always seem to reach an impasse and then on the last day, at 3.00am in the morning some sketchy, pragmatic agreement is clinched and crisis averted. But I think that this time that will not happen, and that Brexit will smack head-first into the cold, hard wall of reality.

A bit like a lion evolved to live on the African plains will surely be alright living in the sea because sharks seem to manage just fine.

Click to expand...

Again more like some PETA types releasing a load of animals shouting FREEEEEDDOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!! The fact they're totally unable to survive in the wild and are all dead a week later, irrelevant, they wanted to free the animals.

If Britain is the caged lion, it'll be the one that ends up eating the bright spark trying to free it...

On a serious note someone important at Tory Hq must know this is going to ruin there chance at government for decades. I can’t belive they won’t have a plan to get rid of the current leadership as sacrificial lambs and force a GE.

Even if they then loose that election to labour completely, the damage to there reputation will be far less than being the party that destroyed the UK.

Click to expand...

I guess you're assuming people will blame them instead of whomever the Conservatives choose to blame, if you tell a lie often enough people start to believe it.

Again more like some PETA types releasing a load of animals shouting FREEEEEDDOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!! The fact they're totally unable to survive in the wild and are all dead a week later, irrelevant, they wanted to free the animals.

If Britain is the caged lion, it'll be the one that ends up eating the bright spark trying to free it...

Click to expand...

You're almost there with your analogy... Except PETA tends to slaughter the animals they "rescue" and have a track record of abducting and killing household pets (and I don't mean weird exotic pets like the North Vietnamese Howling Pygmy Monkey (that's not a real thing btw...), I mean regular ol' domestic cats and dogs).